Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

zcode.z.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 382 posts

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#331

Post by estearum »

simjnd wrote: post #313
estearum wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lmfao You know you're sitting here on the open Internet complaining about the US government with literally zero fear of any repercussions in any sense whatsoever? You should go to an actual authoritarian country and just ask someone their opinion on their government. The difference between flippant, hyperbolic complaining (you) and someone who will actually glance over their shoulder and totally clam up in response t…

The fact that (for now) there are no consequences has no connection to the original point about privacy. The fact that China acts punitively with the data they gather on their citizens, and the US does not (yet), doesn't change at all the fact that the US actively harvests that data in a very aggressive way. There may or may never be a time where the US starts acting on it, covertly or openly. But still, they're siph…

Of course it's relevant!

A country that siphons up data and then arrests you for saying mean things about Dear Leader is a lot, a lot worse than a country that siphons up data and then basically can't do anything with it.

I don't think it should be downplayed, but it certainly isn't the same. It just isn't. It's ridiculous and counterproductive to describe it as such.

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#332

Post by jastuk »

razfar wrote: post #278

For anyone who uses GPT-5.5/Codex as their daily driver, how does GLM-5.2/ZCode compare, esp in a codebase already set up for agentic coding?

I tried it for a couple of hours this morning and yeah, it's a bit slow, and I needed it in peak hours so it also often can't reach the server so that makes it even slower. And I'm not even sure it's just the model, it could very much be the harness. Stalled for 40 minutes on trivial tool calls like `find`, two times...

It shows potential, answer/code quality was solid, but I would need more time with it.

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#335

Post by quantumleaper »

yogthos wrote: post #326
quantumleaper wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have benchmarks comparing against Pi? The blog post doesn't include any hard numbers. For example, so far I haven't seen any evidence that LSP integration improves performance for small models vs using grep via a bash tool.

I haven't really seen anybody come up with a good test to show hard numbers on comparing agentic harnesses. It's a bit tricky to set up a definitive test given the whole non deterministic nature of LLMs. What I've been focusing on is watching the loop and seeing where model does things that it shouldn't have to. For example, I notice models doing stuff like writing python scripts to match parens for Clojure all the t…

How are you iterating on a system prompt and tool descriptions without an eval that gives you hard numbers for improvement or regression?

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#336

Post by ac29 »

QuantumNomad_ wrote: post #308
krzyk wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agent that can apt-get is more useful.

When I was in university in 2009, the student union I was in had set up their Linux computers with a small program that one of the members wrote, that had the suid bit set and would exec apt-get install passing the arguments along. This way, all members of the student union were able to install any software they wanted to on the student union computers without having to give out blanket root access to the members. On…

Giving users ability to use apt with root privileges is pretty much game over security wise. Full root is a malicious package away

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#337

Post by maxdo »

Interesting to see how their harness will show up here. So far, https://cursor.com/evals this even shows still a big gap in performance, and almost no real win in terms of money vs gpt5.5 and sonnet 5.

Which make me raise a question. Why would I install a close source black box, that will send data to a country that you can't make legally liable for even most crazy miss doings.

The market of a hosted commercial version of glm is very weird. yeah you can deploy an open source version or run it locally, sure. This.... hm, i don't know why any company would take any risks to use GLM

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#338

Post by MarceloHenry »

computerex wrote: post #238
MarceloHenry wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

17M tokens... I think it is a lot. What were you working on?

Not really. I have spent 163M deepseek v4 flash tokens in July and it literally just started. https://i.postimg.cc/MHhgwsv0/image.png

I definetily cannot spent too much token in a single month

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#339

Post by saghm »

lelanthran wrote: post #295
saghm wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that there's such severe concern being expressed by Anthropic about Claude being distilled, and the idea that the harness is part of the the moat, it doesn't seem super surprising that the other side of that would try to also make it harder for them to tell how well they're doing and what their approach is.

> and the idea that the harness is part of the the moat, That idea is wrong, though. These same people thinking harnesses are part of a moat are also boasting that s/ware is easily writable now. There's no secret sauce in a harness that you can't vibe-code into your own harness.

Why don't the major players open source their harnesses then? As far as I'm aware, the only time the source code for the Claude harness became available, it was due to a mistake (which is it's own whole thing).

I'm not saying you're wrong necessarily, but I do think that when the actions and words of a company conflict, it's a pretty safe bet that the words are just posturing and the actions better reflect their actual belief. In this case, regardless of what they're saying about software being easily writable now, they clearly seem to at least think there's something valuable in the harness if they're not open sourcing it.

Post reply on HN